Now I have to share profits of my software with Apple. Steve you just lost your mind. As a developer of software if I have to share revenue with Apple on software I write for the Mac, I'll just pass the cost to the user and/or stop developing for the Mac.

???
So you now distribute and manage your updates (to name only 2 things) completely free of cost?
You don't have to participate in the Mac App Store.

I seriously hope they have something more impressive to show us later. The whole segment on Mac OS X Lion was underwhelming.

Did anyone else notice the lack of a title bar on the Mac App Store application window?

And the application launcher, what's wrong with having two buttons with arrows pointing left and right. Much quicker to operate with a mouse than with the multi-touch surface of the mouse. The demonstrator looked like he was having problems having the OS register what he was trying to do.

The new MacBook Air was news worthy at least.

banging.head.against.wall...
It wasn't a demo of Lion, it was an announcement and preview of a couple of features and directions.
Jeez dude.

Steve had a great point about vertically touching a screen all day (but I guess he hasn't read the studies about all the health + IQ improvements you get from STANDING at work -- oh well, wait a few years for those ergonomics).

He (and touch monitor critics) aren't saying anything about standing. The ergonomic issue is about reaching out with your arm horizontally for extended periods.

That said, I will not be purchasing Lion if the major features are downloadable (for 10.6) and pre-existent (I already have a desktop with icons). Apple will certainly show more features, but if they truly had a game-changer, one that affected developers, wouldn't that have shown it today? Isn't that why they showed the App Store?

So Apple has gone from a single button mouse to multi-touch gestures. It will be very interesting to see how that plays out. The guy demoing Mission Control had problems with the gestures being recognized. How frustrating will false readings be for end users? ....

Have you ever done a presentation with millions of people watching?
For christ's sake, the guy's hands were shaking.
Give him a break.

The only thing.. what if we don't have any multi-touch devices attached to our Mac Pro? Does that make most of the new 'features' of 10.7 moot? I already have a giant drawing tablet, sadly doesn't recognize multi-touch.

Wow... I'm impressed that you somehow were able to see ALL of Lion's features today.
Pray tell how you accomplished that? What the rest of us saw was a direction statement and selected preview of a couple of features.

It looks like Spaces as we know it was eliminated from Lion. Spaces was my favorite feature of Leopard, and I never use Exposé or Dashboard currently. I'll be sorely disappointed if they make it only useable with full screen apps.

That might not be the case.

Quote:

Mission Control is a powerful and handy new feature that provides you with a comprehensive view of whats running on your Mac. It gives you a birds-eye view of everything including Exposé, Spaces, Dashboard, and full-screen apps all in one place. With a simple swipe gesture, your desktop zooms out to Mission Control. There you can see your open windows grouped by app, thumbnails of your full-screen apps, Dashboard, and even other Spaces, arranged in a unified view. And you can get to anything you see on Mission Control with just one click. Making you the master of all you survey.

Now I have to share profits of my software with Apple. Steve you just lost your mind. As a developer of software if I have to share revenue with Apple on software I write for the Mac, I'll just pass the cost to the user and/or stop developing for the Mac.

What would you prefer, the cost of packaging, shipping and stocking a box on a dusty shelf at CompUSA? And give CompUSA 60%-70% to CompUSA?

I think Apple will lose long time developers who might find the idea sickening, as some of us feel. Anyone who doesn't see this as a trojan horse deal and only as an "optional" source is drinking too much of the koolaid. I don't mean to sound like a sourpuss, I'm a Mac advocate.

It doesn't matter because for Apple it will still yield a great outcome. There will be a huge influx of new developers whom never developed on the mac and will have everything to gain from the store. In the end Apple will still be Apple, reaping profits, and devaluing other platforms (MS, Chrome) for not having such a successful developer community / system, further encouraging the monopolizing schemes this company, and others will be "integrating".

One last thing... there is an upside. All Apps on the Mac App Store, will definitely need to stay relevant with Apple's quality to really succeed.

I think Apple will lose long time developers who might find the idea sickening, as some of us feel. Anyone who doesn't see this as a trojan horse deal and only as an "optional" source is drinking too much of the koolaid. I don't mean to sound like a sourpuss, I'm a Mac advocate.

It doesn't matter because for Apple it will still yield a great outcome. There will be a huge influx of new developers whom never developed on the mac and will have everything to gain from the store. In the end Apple will still be Apple, reaping profits, and devaluing other platforms (MS, Chrome) for not having such a successful developer community / system, further encouraging the monopolizing schemes this company, and others will be "integrating".

One last thing... there is an upside. All Apps on the Mac App Store, will definitely need to stay relevant with Apple's quality to really succeed.

With all due respect...do both. Use the Apple store and other avenues of retail. Then decide which is the most profitable. I think based on the iPhone App store, the consensus seems, even the major players see it as very successful.

When we get a sneak preview of the next iOS, they show us everything planned for the release. Mac OS X is usually treated the same way.

A Lion is supposed to be King of the Jungle. They should call this release Mac OS X Tabby Cat because it's even lamer than Snow Leopard was. I want to see the same innovation on the desktop as I'm seeing on mobile devices.

Quote:

Originally Posted by dreyfus2

Hm, I really think this was mainly to show the new application store and get submissions rolling, and secondly to alert developers to make their desktop apps full screen ready, if they want to. They will not present everything they have in the pipeline some 9 months in advance... not with so many companies copying everything they do.

I actually like the new OSX and iOS integration thing. It will work well, I'm sure of it. One thing I hope however, is that they keep the old spaces/expose. From the Demo, (which was only short) and from what I saw, you can only use 'spaces' with full screen apps. I sure hope that isn't the case.

Also, if you have more than 10 full screen apps open for instance, wouldn't it be difficult to navigate via only moving left/right instead of showing a grid view like the spaces on SL?

I like it, but I was hoping they would actually do the opposite. i.e. integrate more of OSX into iOS during the 4.0 release. I was desperately hoping for a UI update. We have pretty much has exactly the same UI for both OSX and iOS for the last 3 years. ;(

What would you prefer, the cost of packaging, shipping and stocking a box on a dusty shelf at CompUSA? And give CompUSA 60%-70% to CompUSA?

Or put it on the Apple store and start collecting checks?

Perhaps I'm missing something here!

Yes: almost no one buys software at CompUSA.

In fact, the number of apps purchased from any physical store vs download is way tiny, likely less than 1%.

So ROI comparisons with brick-and-morter are kinda silly in the 21st century. The real comparison is your web site vs. Apple's. Sure, they have more eyeballs, but they have so many eyeballs looking for so many things that reaching your target customer won't be much easier than it is now.

Anyone who thinks they won't have to do any marketing once the App Store opens for Mac doesn't ship software for a living, and hasn't even bothered to ask any of the 90% of current App Store developers making less than minimum wage there. Selling software is not a magic thing that only Apple can do. The exposure in the App Store will initially be a helpful addition, but as other online outlets dwindle over time (say goodbye to VersionTracker and MacUpdate) that'll level off. You'll be doing as much marketing as ever before if you're smart.

The main difference is that Mac software will come with a 30% tax. The only question is whether end users will pay it with higher prices, or developers will just give up a third of their bread so Steve can get fat.

That said, I will not be purchasing Lion if the major features are downloadable (for 10.6) and pre-existent (I already have a desktop with icons). Apple will certainly show more features, but if they truly had a game-changer, one that affected developers, wouldn't that have shown it today? Isn't that why they showed the App Store?

Come on Apple! What happened to you guys?

No they wouldn't, it gives Microsoft too much time to fire up the photocopiers. There will also be a full segment of apps that you may not have access to if you don't upgrade (full screen apps).

This preview pretty much seals it for me. 10.7 is the last version of OSX (you can't top Lion). The next version will have iOS merging with OSX to form a unified platform (read iPhones with full computing capabilities, not iMacs with limited computing capabilities).

In fact, the number of apps purchased from any physical store vs download is way tiny, likely less than 1%.

So ROI comparisons with brick-and-morter are kinda silly in the 21st century. The real comparison is your web site vs. Apple's. Sure, they have more eyeballs, but they have so many eyeballs looking for so many things that reaching your target customer won't be much easier than it is now.

Anyone who thinks they won't have to do any marketing once the App Store opens for Mac doesn't ship software for a living, and hasn't even bothered to ask any of the 90% of current App Store developers making less than minimum wage there. Selling software is not a magic thing that only Apple can do. The exposure in the App Store will initially be a helpful addition, but as other online outlets dwindle over time (say goodbye to VersionTracker and MacUpdate) that'll level off. You'll be doing as much marketing as ever before if you're smart.

The main difference is that Mac software will come with a 30% tax. The only question is whether end users will pay it with higher prices, or developers will just give up a third of their bread so Steve can get fat.

After watching him today I can go either way. The man needs a burger.

Understood, the reference to CompUSA is to show how far "advanced" the App store is! I wasn't trying to be "silly!"

This preview pretty much seals it for me. 10.7 is the last version of OSX (you can't top Lion). The next version will have iOS merging with OSX to form a unified platform (read iPhones with full computing capabilities, not iMacs with limited computing capabilities).

I've been able to do full screen apps since System 7. It's called the maximize button.

C'mon Apple!

If you would have paid attention, you would have realized that the apps presented do much more than presenting a full screen (as in maximized window) mode... they provide a second GUI to the same app. There is one windowed GUI with, say, a document window, an inspector, etc. and an app centric (iPad style) full screen GUI. That might not be the invention of the decade, but it sure is useful. E.g. it will allow developers who make an iPad and a desktop version of the same app to provide the same GUI on the desktop (for those who are happy with the simplified GUI and do not require access to more detailed settings). For example: I would love if OmniFocus on the desktop would offer the iPad GUI when switching to full screen mode. The cluttered document plus inspector GUI ruins this program, but it gives you a few more choices one may need less than 1% of the time. Having both would be ideal and reduce the learning curve for users buying both versions.

Apple did actually start this earlier with Pages '09 and it is absolutely useful. For developers it may mean that a future Xcode version will support two GUIs per app as a standard, and that the maximize/zoom button will automatically swap between GUIs if there is more than one. Once this is a standard, more devs will make use of it and this could result in interesting products. But whining is easier I guess...

Now I have to share profits of my software with Apple. Steve you just lost your mind. As a developer of software if I have to share revenue with Apple on software I write for the Mac, I'll just pass the cost to the user and/or stop developing for the Mac.

No, you don't. You're either failing at reading, or at comprehension.

It's an OFFER. Apple is making an additional distribution channel available to you, one that will come preinstalled on every single Mac, and will probably generate a lot more sales than you are experiencing if you're freelance distributing. The added sales will make up the 30% revenue Apple is taking, if you CHOOSE to distribute that way (and if your software doesn't suck).

If you're a small independent publisher, what are your options for reaching Mac users?
-Radio and TV ads are prohibitively expensive.
-Ads in magazines aren't much better, and circulation isn't great these days.
-Google ads, listing in MacUpdate or Version Tracker are all fine, but they don't generate much traffic.
-Hooking up with a major distribution house is going to cost you a fortune, assuming they're even interested in whatever product you sell, which realistically they probably are not.
-Word of mouth is free, but really...how many people can you reach that way? Forums, features on Blogs and things like that help a little, but are still essentially word of mouth.

Here's a channel that Apple has already shown works. People will almost certainly use it for the ease of browsing, buying, installing, and updating, especially "new" Mac users who are often fleeing the crazy installs of the Windows world.

If your product is good and appeals to a large audience, you should significantly increase your sales. If it's a niche product...maybe not.

Now I have to share profits of my software with Apple. Steve you just lost your mind. As a developer of software if I have to share revenue with Apple on software I write for the Mac, I'll just pass the cost to the user and/or stop developing for the Mac.

Oh, man, you are a developer, an intelligent person, how could you not see the big possibilities you have right now to become a millionaire in two months.

First, Steve said: "App Store IS NOT the only way to bring apps to the Mac". Clearly he said that the things will still be the way they are.

Second, the Mac App Store is a dream come true to any user, and any developer. Is the best way to create an app and distribute it in a public place everybody has the chance to view it and buy it, and if it is good you are going to make a lot of money in less time than you ever have done in you're entire life.

I really can't understand people. That's the perfect thing but always have to complain... You know what? You must thank God or Life or whatever you believe in, that you have both of your hands, your eyes, and do not live in Somalia or Congo, and you can sleep in a bed and eat everyday. It's not that I want to give life lessons now, but please! Do not complain about every single thing. God!!

It's an OFFER. Apple is making an additional distribution channel available to you, one that will come preinstalled on every single Mac, and will probably generate a lot more sales than you are experiencing if you're freelance distributing. The added sales will make up the 30% revenue Apple is taking, if you CHOOSE to distribute that way (and if your software doesn't suck).

If you're a small independent publisher, what are your options for reaching Mac users?
-Radio and TV ads are prohibitively expensive.
-Ads in magazines aren't much better, and circulation isn't great these days.
-Google ads, listing in MacUpdate or Version Tracker are all fine, but they don't generate much traffic.
-Hooking up with a major distribution house is going to cost you a fortune, assuming they're even interested in whatever product you sell, which realistically they probably are not.
-Word of mouth is free, but really...how many people can you reach that way? Forums, features on Blogs and things like that help a little, but are still essentially word of mouth.

Here's a channel that Apple has already shown works. People will almost certainly use it for the ease of browsing, buying, installing, and updating, especially "new" Mac users who are often fleeing the crazy installs of the Windows world.

If your product is good and appeals to a large audience, you should significantly increase your sales. If it's a niche product...maybe not.

Now I have to share profits of my software with Apple. Steve you just lost your mind. As a developer of software if I have to share revenue with Apple on software I write for the Mac, I'll just pass the cost to the user and/or stop developing for the Mac.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr. Me

For apps sold through the Apple Store, the developer gets 70% of a lot. Selling these same apps through their own websites, they got 100% of a little. Oh, pray tell when will Apple stop? Helping developers dramatically increase their earnings. It's downright evil!

Then go sell your software through another retailer.

Oh, wait. They take 50%.

Never mind......

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13

A web host and billing system only costs 2-2.5%. The only exception I know of is porn, which probably bumps that to as high as 15% (being extremely generous here).

The MOST expensive system I could find is regnow.com which handles everything concerning billing (including cred cards, returns, etc.) and they charge 7%.

If you sell an app though Apple's store you're not only giving up 30% but you have to go through their bureaucratic system to get 30% of the 70% you're owed, plus they don't deposit immediately into your account, instead having essentially their own bank plus they can bump you off at any time without warning plus there is probably a $100 annual fee plus....

Oh forget it. It'll BOMB if most developers have an ounce of sense and initiative.

You missed his point. Most people don't know about mac update. There's already an app store for the mac too, although I can't think of the name right now. A pre installed app store from Apple would be seen by all mac users, allowing developers to reach a broader audience, while still allowing for distribution through other channels.

If you're a small independent publisher, what are your options for reaching Mac users?
-Radio and TV ads are prohibitively expensive.

App store doesn't advertise

Quote:

-Ads in magazines aren't much better, and circulation isn't great these days.

App store doesn't advertise

Quote:

-Google ads, listing in MacUpdate or Version Tracker are all fine, but they don't generate much traffic.

App store doesn't advertise

Quote:

-Hooking up with a major distribution house is going to cost you a fortune, assuming they're even interested in whatever product you sell, which realistically they probably are not.

App store doesn't advertise

Quote:

-Word of mouth is free, but really...how many people can you reach that way? Forums, features on Blogs and things like that help a little, but are still essentially word of mouth.

App store doesn't advertise. At best if your app is ALREADY popular they will list it higher. They don't do shit for the hundreds of floundering apps which don't get noticed. That is 100% up to the developer, as ANY iPhone developer will tell you!

Quote:

Here's a channel that Apple has already shown works. People will almost certainly use it for the ease of browsing, buying, installing, and updating, especially "new" Mac users who are often fleeing the crazy installs of the Windows world.

Back to comparing Apples to Apples....Apple currently has a "Mac OS X Software...." link (which doesn't list much software compared to MacUpdate, but I digress). You can download apps they have highlighted and easily install them.

With their app store, I expect this listing to go away and Apple to turn around and charge people 30% for the privilege of what most competing systems charge 2-2.5%.

Quote:

If your product is good and appeals to a large audience, you should significantly increase your sales. If it's a niche product...maybe not.

But either way, it's optional.

What would increase sales is cheaper Macs, not higher software prices.

You missed his point. Most people don't know about mac update. There's already an app store for the mac too, although I can't think of the name right now. A pre installed app store from Apple would be seen by all mac users, allowing developers to reach a broader audience, while still allowing for distribution through other channels.

I like the idea, but the fees are wholly without comparison.

And for those people who don't know about MacUpdate, well, I feel sorry for you lot. Hell, if I google something as generic as "mac software" it's the 7th link. It has a nice interface and works well...and it's FREE! You can even buy a $20 app (pays for site membership) that keeps all your software up to date.

Developers don't pay a red cent to list.

Now, I understand that there is quality assurance and an install system and that is worth SOMETHING, but 30%?!?! Sorry, Apple can spout all it wants about "industry standard commission" but that is demonstrably bullshit outside Steve's RDF.